I think there needs to be a little clarification on the SCOTUS case...

[armyowalgreens]

The court is not ruling on whether or not corporations are persons with the same rights as individual citizens.


It has to decide on the speech rights of corporations and unions. No matter how you try to twist the decision, it is not ruling on corporate personhood.

While the decision has far reaching consequences, I think some DUers are incorrectly portraying the ruling.

While I do not like to defend Scalia he is not attempting to establish corporate personhood or "fascism". As stated in DU, corporate personhood has already been established.

[MNDemNY]

1. Corporate "personhood" has already been established.

[armyowalgreens]

2. Added that to my OP and trimmed out some other stuff.

[sharesunited]

3. Fiction's Fool.

A corporation isn't real
It doesn't think, it doesn't feel
A legal fiction; an ideal
By right should serve the commonweal

And when it contravenes this task
Then all of us must duly ask
If law shall be a human tool
Or people play the fiction's fool.

[Winterblues]

4. What they are ruling on is whether Corporations have the same or more rights to contribute

to a Political campaign. Right now it is illegal for a Corporation to contribute directly. they can form PACs and use them for their bribery but can not by Law contribute directly. This case if decided in their favor will make it where they can spend directly to influence a Political Campaign.